If you identify yourself as a conservative, what do you mean by "Conservative?"?

I’m conservative in that I support Federal legislation that is written in a manner where it clearly is necessary to defend the rights guaranteed in the Constitution and allowed by the enabling mechanisms therein.

I stray from a purely conservative viewpoint at times, but I am willing to admit that a particular viewpoint is on shaky Constitutional ground if I do.

I’m conservative in the sense that classical liberals were, at one point referred to as. Now, if anyone asks, I just say little-l libertarian or anti-authoritarian. These political labels are convoluted beyond all recognition these days anyway. In my mind, true conservatism is opposed to both the night-watchman style “conservatism” that the modern Republican Party has adopted (which is closer to neoconservatism) as well as authoritarian left-wing elements that have been adopted by the Democratic Party. But again, this shit is all convoluted anyway. I’m sure someone will be along shortly to tell me why I’m wrong.

Now, to answer your questions directly from my own perspective:

Things to stay the same?
Not necessarily. I believe that both radicalism and reactionary-ism is dangerous to our Republic. The Constitution is rather strict and tough to amend for a reason… to make it hard for dangerous radical as well as reactionary elements to get a foothold.

The government to intercede more to prevent “bad” behavior?

You mean like peeking in people’s bedrooms to see who they’re fucking, telling people what they can and can’t put in their bodies, telling women they have to have babies they don’t want, and telling me what I can and cannot do with money I earn and property I buy? Beyond what’s laid out in the Constitution and derived from as such that’s a big Hell No.

The government to implement laws that promote old social orders?

True conservatism != regression or a reactionary doctrine.

The government to do less to interfere with the “pursuit of happiness” by the people?

Yes.

The government to spend less?

Yes, ideally.

You are generally opposed to change?

Depends on the kind of change we are talking here.
If it’s CHANGE™, or communist revolution, or a turn to theocracy, or so on, then yes. If it is the natural progression of a nation to greater liberties for more people without trampling on the liberties of others, then no.

Now, off to write a paper about African religions. Brb.

I am fiscally and environmentally conservative.
I also consider smaller government and less government interference in my personal life to be conservative.
I think government should take care of defense, infrastructure, some education, health and food safety and a safety net for the truly disabled and elderly.

Oh and just about everything that @Fiddle_Playing_Creole_Bastard said.

@wilma This gets to the heart of it. You say you’re “environmentally conservative” meaning that you want things to be as they were, or that you want the government to have a hands off policy, or that whoever owns the land makes the rules?, or you oppose the opening of natural venues to commercial exploitation?

I used to identify as a conservative, before I voted in my first election. I had an idea that “conservativism” was á la Barry Goldwater. The term has been modified to mean something other than that since then.

@Fiddle_Playing_Creole_Bastard wrote my answer for me.

As for @wilma‘s response about “environmentally conservative”, while I can’t speak to what the term means to her, I can say that I favor “conservation”. The government shouldn’t operate a Forest Service, for example, that provides and maintains roads into National Forests that are also owned and maintained by the Federal government, and then give away the timber at fire-sale prices to well-connected lumber companies. And at the same time tell me what I may or may not do on my own land. But I wouldn’t say that that’s “the heart of it”; that’s really a small part of “it”.

I also think that what is happening in Wisconsin, for example, although it’s being botched from a public relations standpoint, is a good example of what a “conservative” government should do. Public employee unions are represented on one side of a bargaining table mediated by politicians… and no one is on the other side to say “those demands are outrageous and we can’t afford them”. It’s about time that we limit the reach of those unions, though I don’t suppose it’s going to work this time around. Too much government is being done by bureaucracies and executive branch regulation, far more than was ever intended by the Founders – and far more than is wise. And as has been obvious since the 1950s, the more liberal candidates reap the benefits of expanding government at the polls, since the more they expand, the more people ‘benefit’ from the expansion… and vote to keep returning that party to power.

Heinlein was right when he said that governments fail when the voters realize that all they have to do is vote for bread and circuses to be provided ‘by others’. He was a conservative of the type that I thought I wanted to be. Considering the road that we’re on and the speed we’re traveling on it, I’m afraid that the one point I might take issue with @Fiddle_Playing_Creole_Bastard is that we are going to need a good dose of healthy radical little-l libertarianism to fix things.

Churchill once said about us that, “You can always trust the Americans to do the right thing… after they have tried everything else.” It seems like we’ve tried just about everything else now, haven’t we?

@Fiddle_Playing_Creole_Bastard The “night watchman” state is the model advocated by most small-L libertarians, thanks to the influence of libertarian philosopher Robert Nozick. If you are more of a Lockean, then I’d suggest sticking to the term “classical liberal.”

@SavoirFaire, thanks for the info. I actually was unaware of that.

No worries. You are quite correct about how convoluted the terms have become, and this is just another case of it.

@6rant6 “environmentally conservative” In the sense that @WasCy stated and also, in the recycle, reuse, restore very practical sense that has been so usurped by some “liberals” and I hate the labels we seem to use. By that I Mean what I hear so often; that “conservatives don’t care about the environment and just want to use up and waste and ruin the Earth.”

I guess you could count me in on the “enviro-conservative” bandwagon as well, though I lean towards the old-school Theodore Roosevelt brand of conservationism that is, preserving nature so that it can be enjoyed and used responsibly, rather than raping it, or making it completely untouchable.

Additionally, though I do like the idea of a limited government, I have no problem with the National Parks system, from that perspective.

Change of things. I dislike it. But, in order to stay up-to-date, I roll with the punches.

Examples, tattoos on human bodies, metal hanging loose from human skin and hair the color of the rainbow.

Change of things….....dislike it….....conservative.

@john65pennington Apprciate the answer.

Jut to flesh out a bit… you’re okay with women going blond, and football players and boxers concussing each other? How about implants? How about organ transplants? How about make up? I’m guessing a man dressing as a woman gets under your skin?